Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Utah: Concealed Weapons Allowed On Campus

Utah 2007 Concealed Weapons

  • Please log in to reply
44 replies to this topic

#21 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 02:56 AM

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 08:49 AM, said:

Never assume anything.  If unclear, ask, which Broph elected not to do since my earlier statement was exaggerated to mean something I hadn't intended it to.  My comment in post #4 was merely an exaggeration of my own that shouldn't have been taken so literally.

Given that Cho fired off well over 170 bullets according to most news-reports, I find it an understandable mistake to make.

Quote

People who carry know better than to shoot from the hip and so forth.  Why?  Because they know full well that the consequences for such an act are quite severe, and they don't wish to be part of the problem or make things worse for themselves or anyone else.

What do you base this on? I've never been in a firefight thank heavens, and hope never to be in one, but why do you naturally assume that everyone carrying a gun will be cool, calm and collected once shooting starts?

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#22 Captain Jack

Captain Jack

    Where's the rum?

  • Islander
  • 14,914 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 04:18 AM

View PostGodeskian, on Apr 27 2007, 12:56 AM, said:

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 08:49 AM, said:

Never assume anything.  If unclear, ask, which Broph elected not to do since my earlier statement was exaggerated to mean something I hadn't intended it to.  My comment in post #4 was merely an exaggeration of my own that shouldn't have been taken so literally.

Given that Cho fired off well over 170 bullets according to most news-reports, I find it an understandable mistake to make.

I wasn't talking about Cho.   He would never have gotten off nearly that many if someone with a CC permit had brought him down.  Cho's 170 rounds just shows he missed about 100 times.

Quote

Quote

People who carry know better than to shoot from the hip and so forth.  Why?  Because they know full well that the consequences for such an act are quite severe, and they don't wish to be part of the problem or make things worse for themselves or anyone else.

What do you base this on? I've never been in a firefight thank heavens, and hope never to be in one, but why do you naturally assume that everyone carrying a gun will be cool, calm and collected once shooting starts?

Why do you naturaly assume they won't?
Posted Image
689 Reasons to Defeat Barack Obama in 2012:

https://www.national...at-barack-obama

#23 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 04:21 AM

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 10:18 AM, said:

Why do you naturaly assume they won't?

Actually, I haven't made an assumption that they won't. I'm saying that I don't consider the risk worth the benefits.

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#24 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 06:41 AM

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 02:45 AM, said:

And you took it literally?  Shame on you.

Spidey, it's up to you to post what you mean. You said a hail of bullets; why should we think anything else? If there are 20 other students in the class and they all see a crazy gunman, should they all assume that just the closest one is going to be the one who will take the shots to take out the crazy gunman?

Quote

The last time I checked, bullets can't go around corners, change direction in mid air, or go through brick walls.  So, people can still run for cover.

And while they're running for cover, they're out in the open and can be shot. Go around corners? They're running for cover; they're not under cover. Change direction in mid-air? Many gunmen can track a moving object.

Quote

No, he didn't do it when he shot at those kids.

I didn't ask what he did; I took your example to the next logical step. If someone knows that others are armed, might they start shooting from a position of cover.

Quote

Looking for cover was not even on his mind, and he certainly didn't care about dying, so he wouldn't have bother either way.

I think you're assuming too much based on what you've heard in news reports. You don't know what was on his mind; you don't know what he cared about. Neither do I.

Quote

You should be sorry.

No need to make this personal, Spidey.

Quote

Because they are more careful because they have to be if they wish to keep their permits to carry.  One wrong act, and it's good-bye permit, and they know it.

I'm sorry again, but you're assuming once again.

Quote

I know quite a few that CC as well that are in different states.  Those poeple have buddies that CC, and their buddies CC, and so on.

It doesn't really work that way. Just because you know people who act a certain way doesn't mean that it carries forward to others.

Quote

It isn't an opinion when it is FACT.

IMHO, what you stated is opinion, not fact. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that suggests that your statement simply isn't fact.

Quote

Law abiding gun owners aren't that stupid. It's part of their training to keep a cool head, and it is the NOT ALLOWED to take a shot if you can't make your hit without hurting some one else.

Um, Dick Cheney. I rest my case.

Quote

It's one of the most basic rules of handgun ownership to NEVER take a shot unless the target is properly aquired, and that the shooter knows of what or who is behind that target.  It's even part of the friggin' tests.

Um, Dick Cheney. I rest my case.

Quote

Why, because it's a fact that doesn't suit YOUR opinion?

It's not about opinion. One incident doesn't make the rule. If I've never seen a car before and someone shows me a blue car, should I assume that all cars are blue? Of course not!

Quote

It's fact, and there have been other cases of it as well.  I listed an example, and a valid one at that.

Um, Dick Cheney. I rest my case.

#25 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 06:47 AM

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 07:49 AM, said:

Never assume anything.  If unclear, ask, which Broph elected not to do since my earlier statement was exaggerated to mean something I hadn't intended it to.

I made no such assumption. You asked why someone would talk about a "hail of bullets" when it was you who had made such a statement. You didn't say "I was making a metaphor"; you didn't seem to know where the idea came from when you were the originator of it.

As far as making assumptions, IMHO, you've made several in this thread.

Quote

The point I was trying to make is, people who choose to legally carry, will stop a person like Cho as quickly as possible, and by that, I don't mean "Shoot-out at the O.K. Corral" as I have said in later posts.  People who carry know better than to shoot from the hip and so forth.

This is a perfect example of an assumption. You're assuming that everyone who carries has particular knowledge and skills. You also say that they'll "stop a person...as quickly as possible", but that they won't "shoot from the hip". Will they organize a committee and decide on a best course of action? Will they vote on a leader and compare marksmanship results before shooting, all the while the crazy gunman is firing off rounds? What if he takes out the best shot? Does the 2nd best shooter then get promoted to take him out?

#26 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 06:50 AM

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 09:18 AM, said:

I wasn't talking about Cho.   He would never have gotten off nearly that many if someone with a CC permit had brought him down.

"if" is the operative word. If someone had brought him down then he wouldn't have gotten off that many rounds (unless the CC permit person took him out in the last classroom, of course). But if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

Quote

Cho's 170 rounds just shows he missed about 100 times.

Remember that he also had to shoot through doors when people were blocking them.

Quote

Why do you naturaly assume they won't?

I don't understand why you think it's OK for you to assume that they will, yet you criticize someone for considering the possibility that they won't.

#27 Vapor Trails

Vapor Trails

    In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big.

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 16,523 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 09:52 AM

View PostBroph, on Apr 27 2007, 07:41 AM, said:

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 02:45 AM, said:

Law abiding gun owners aren't that stupid. It's part of their training to keep a cool head, and it is the NOT ALLOWED to take a shot if you can't make your hit without hurting some one else.

Um, Dick Cheney. I rest my case.

Quote

It's one of the most basic rules of handgun ownership to NEVER take a shot unless the target is properly aquired, and that the shooter knows of what or who is behind that target.  It's even part of the friggin' tests.

Um, Dick Cheney. I rest my case.

Quote

It's fact, and there have been other cases of it as well.  I listed an example, and a valid one at that.

Um, Dick Cheney. I rest my case.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

:hehe:
Posted Image

Politicians are like bananas; they hang together, they're all yellow, and there's not a straight one among them.

"We're relevant for $ and a vote once every two years. Beyond that, we're completely irrelevant, except of course to consume, and preach the gospel according to [insert political demigod here]."--Cait

#28 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 12:00 PM

View PostGodeskian, on Apr 27 2007, 05:21 AM, said:

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 10:18 AM, said:

Why do you naturaly assume they won't?

Actually, I haven't made an assumption that they won't. I'm saying that I don't consider the risk worth the benefits.

What risk. You know you might want to stop taking a shower as most accident and deaths happen in the bathroom. You had better work from home as a percentage of people on the road are in accidents on a daily basis. Not sure about food and drink percentage that are risk inducing either due to content or leaving them out of the frige long enough.

The chances for a gun to misfire with the modern safeties is fairly low. That someone will try to use a gun on you is fairly small unless you provoke them.  

Now accidents happen but to assume that a gun is a accident is just waiting to happen is pretty far out there. By the way air travel is still the safeest means of long distance travel. But watch out that the engine does not drop off.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#29 Captain Jack

Captain Jack

    Where's the rum?

  • Islander
  • 14,914 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 02:10 PM

View PostGodeskian, on Apr 27 2007, 02:21 AM, said:

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 10:18 AM, said:

Why do you naturaly assume they won't?

Actually, I haven't made an assumption that they won't. I'm saying that I don't consider the risk worth the benefits.

Well, we have certainly seen fantastic benefits on NOT carrying a legal permit gun on campus, haven't we?

View PostBroph, on Apr 27 2007, 04:41 AM, said:

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 02:45 AM, said:

And you took it literally?  Shame on you.

Spidey, it's up to you to post what you mean. You said a hail of bullets; why should we think anything else? If there are 20 other students in the class and they all see a crazy gunman, should they all assume that just the closest one is going to be the one who will take the shots to take out the crazy gunman?

You assume all 20 will be packing.  You assume the closest one will be packing.  It doesn't work that way.

Quote

Quote

The last time I checked, bullets can't go around corners, change direction in mid air, or go through brick walls.  So, people can still run for cover.

And while they're running for cover, they're out in the open and can be shot. Go around corners? They're running for cover; they're not under cover. Change direction in mid-air? Many gunmen can track a moving object.

This is just getting rediculous.  Anyone who has tried shoot clay with a shotgun will tell you it isn't easy to do.  Handguns are even harder to track a moving target simply because of their limited sight radius compared to any long gun.  Then there's shooting proficiency.  Cho was no expert assassin.  In fact, there have been no expert assissins shooting committing acts like this in US history.  All of them were derranged retards with little or no shooting experience.  Cho's victims were all in close range, and he was going for whoever he could find.  Are you saying you prefer to just stand still and not bother to run for cover?  Not even try?  Come on, man.  Once a round is fired, it can NOT change direction in mid air.  That is what I said, and you know it.  People, however can duck, run, turn, roll, hide, etc.

Quote

Quote

No, he didn't do it when he shot at those kids.

I didn't ask what he did; I took your example to the next logical step. If someone knows that others are armed, might they start shooting from a position of cover.

Hello?  Why do you think it is called CONCEALED CARRY?!?!  No one can know if a person is armed.  This makes your assumption invalid.  On top of that, in order to take a position of cover, it requires him to stay there, limiting his number of targets versus roaming around a dorm or building.

Quote

Quote

Looking for cover was not even on his mind, and he certainly didn't care about dying, so he wouldn't have bother either way.

I think you're assuming too much based on what you've heard in news reports. You don't know what was on his mind; you don't know what he cared about. Neither do I.

His actions blatantly show what was on his mind; to hunt down and kill as many students and teacher he could find.  He can't do that if he is looking for cover.  He knew students and teachers were unarmed.  He knew he would be unopposed by them.

Quote

Quote

Because they are more careful because they have to be if they wish to keep their permits to carry.  One wrong act, and it's good-bye permit, and they know it.

I'm sorry again, but you're assuming once again.

Again, it's not an assumption.  It is a fact that if a CC holder has misused his privilages of carrying, his gun toting days are over.  Given how hard it is to get a permit, they don't want to lose it.  Their name is with the Sherriff's office, the State, and their gun serial number is as well.

Quote

Quote

I know quite a few that CC as well that are in different states.  Those poeple have buddies that CC, and their buddies CC, and so on.

It doesn't really work that way. Just because you know people who act a certain way doesn't mean that it carries forward to others.

So tell me, how many law-abiding CC holders have gone on a killing rampage lately?  NONE.

Quote

Quote

Law abiding gun owners aren't that stupid. It's part of their training to keep a cool head, and it is the NOT ALLOWED to take a shot if you can't make your hit without hurting some one else.

It's one of the most basic rules of handgun ownership to NEVER take a shot unless the target is properly aquired, and that the shooter knows of what or who is behind that target.  It's even part of the friggin' tests.

It's fact, and there have been other cases of it as well.  I listed an example, and a valid one at that.

Um, Dick Cheney. I rest my case.

Um, Dick doesn't have a Concealed carry permit.  Dick wasn't taking a shot at a killer.  Dick wasn't using a handgun.  How do you know Dick wasn't deliberately aiming for Harry (I think that was his name).  He probably was, since any shotgun owner who hunts will tell you that the shot pattern was a lot closer than 30 feet away.  We will never know for sure.  We don't know the facts.  You're making an assumption.

View PostBroph, on Apr 27 2007, 04:47 AM, said:

This is a perfect example of an assumption. You're assuming that everyone who carries has particular knowledge and skills. You also say that they'll "stop a person...as quickly as possible", but that they won't "shoot from the hip". Will they organize a committee and decide on a best course of action? Will they vote on a leader and compare marksmanship results before shooting, all the while the crazy gunman is firing off rounds? What if he takes out the best shot? Does the 2nd best shooter then get promoted to take him out?

And you don't listen.  Anyone who carries HAS to have KNOWLEDGE and SKILLS.  It's part of the tests in order to get such a thing.  The rest of you statements are just rediculous.  Utterly rediculous.  You're turning this into a friggin circus, and I'm fed up with it.  That was not what I was implying.  If they can't take a shot, they won't.  Why?  Because they don't want it on their conscience of shooting an innocent bystandard.  If they can take the shot, without risk to themselves or others, they will if they choose to.  Given your smart ass remarks, I'd like to respond to them, but doing so will probably get me suspended, and you're not worth it.
Posted Image
689 Reasons to Defeat Barack Obama in 2012:

https://www.national...at-barack-obama

#30 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 02:25 PM

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 08:10 PM, said:

Anyone who carries HAS to have KNOWLEDGE and SKILLS.  It's part of the tests in order to get such a thing.


Because in America no one can get a gun without a license, and carry it in a concealed holster?

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#31 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 02:50 PM

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 07:10 PM, said:

Well, we have certainly seen fantastic benefits on NOT carrying a legal permit gun on campus, haven't we?

Sure we have. In such places where such permits aren't allowed, dozens of people aren't killed daily by vigilantes.

Quote

You assume all 20 will be packing.  You assume the closest one will be packing.  It doesn't work that way.

I assumed no such thing; I only offered it as a possibility.

Quote

This is just getting rediculous.  Anyone who has tried shoot clay with a shotgun will tell you it isn't easy to do.

People don't run as fast as clay pigeons fly. They're also much bigger than clay pigeons and instead of running in an arc across a field, they're running away from the shooter, so their left/right deviation isn't going to be as much.

Quote

Handguns are even harder to track a moving target simply because of their limited sight radius compared to any long gun.

You aim your arm at the target and pull the trigger.

Quote

Then there's shooting proficiency.  Cho was no expert assassin.

You're making another assumption. Please back up your statement. He killed 32 people in very little time.

Quote

In fact, there have been no expert assissins shooting committing acts like this in US history.  All of them were derranged retards with little or no shooting experience.

The video of the Columbine shooters would disagree with you there.

Quote

Are you saying you prefer to just stand still and not bother to run for cover?

Where did I say any such thing?

Quote

Once a round is fired, it can NOT change direction in mid air.  That is what I said, and you know it.

Um, it doesn't need to. If it was fired in the right direction. The gunman can also pull the trigger a second time.

Quote

People, however can duck, run, turn, roll, hide, etc.

Duck - while head shots are the most lethal, many such attacks are torso shots; it's a bigger target. Ducking doesn't help.

Run - great, but unless you are close to something to hide behind, a bullet moves a lot faster than a person.

Turn - that won't really help against a second shot.

Roll - I don't think dropping to the ground is the best defence. These people aren't on fire; they're being fired at.

Hide - doesn't really help unless you're right near the thing to hide behind. And nothing is stopping the gunman from following you or shooting through the thing you're hiding behind.

Quote

Hello?  Why do you think it is called CONCEALED CARRY?!?!  No one can know if a person is armed.

Hello? If he knows that there are people in his community who are licensed to concealed carry, he'll assume that they're among his targets and he'll begin from a position of concealment himself.

Quote

On top of that, in order to take a position of cover, it requires him to stay there, limiting his number of targets versus roaming around a dorm or building.

Can't he duck, run, turn, roll and hide? Can't he use a desk or chair as a shield? He could have even fired right from the doorway, extending only his arm into the room!

Quote

His actions blatantly show what was on his mind; to hunt down and kill as many students and teacher he could find.

You're assuming that this is all that was on his mind.

Quote

He can't do that if he is looking for cover.

He knew that the police could be there at any moment.

Quote

Again, it's not an assumption.  It is a fact that if a CC holder has misused his privilages of carrying, his gun toting days are over.

Sure it's an assumption. It's one thing to know a thing and it's another to actually practice it daily. How many cops do you see speeding on the highway, breaking the law? And even if his license is taken away, what would stop him from carrying concealed anyway? The lead singer for Blues Traveler was just caught with a bunch of hidden weapons in his car. Not having a license didn't stop him.

Quote

So tell me, how many law-abiding CC holders have gone on a killing rampage lately?  NONE.

How many left-handed mulato touch-typists have become astronauts lately? NONE. That doesn't mean we couldn't get one tomorrow. You're assuming that past experience will bear out in the future. It doesn't work that way.

Quote

Um, Dick doesn't have a Concealed carry permit.

Read your statement again. You didn't specify concealed permit carriers. You said law-abiding gun owners.

Quote

Dick wasn't taking a shot at a killer.

Read your statement again. You didn't specify taking a shot at a killer. Although you specified handguns (can shotgun rules be so different?), you said "It's one of the most basic rules of handgun ownership to NEVER take a shot unless the target is properly aquired, and that the shooter knows of what or who is behind that target."

You just said "target"; you didn't specify "killer". Whether or not he was shooting at quail or a killer, wouldn't the rule apply? Are there no rules about aquiring targets when quails are the subject? Do we not have to worry about what's behind the quail when we're shooting?

Quote

We don't know the facts.  You're making an assumption.

Again, you're accusing me of doing the very thing that you're doing.

Quote

And you don't listen.  Anyone who carries HAS to have KNOWLEDGE and SKILLS.

No; anyone who carries just has a license. What if the instructor was a schlub? You're making assumptions.

Quote

The rest of you statements are just rediculous.  Utterly rediculous.

Logic is never ridiculous.

Quote

If they can't take a shot, they won't.  Why?  Because they don't want it on their conscience of shooting an innocent bystandard.

Pat Tillman. I rest my case.

#32 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 27 April 2007 - 10:45 PM

Well lets see the last time I heard of vigilanties was New York City. Where a concealed weapons permits are not issued. And then the number of victims was I think 6 not the dozens you envisioned being gunned down by the poeople with these permits. In this policy has been going on for a while. Where are the piles of dead people.

Where are the reports of the over 4000 killed at that single university in 2006? Since gun owners cannot control their weapons or themselves enough to not kill the dozen or so each day.

Edited by G1223, 27 April 2007 - 10:45 PM.

If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#33 Captain Jack

Captain Jack

    Where's the rum?

  • Islander
  • 14,914 posts

Posted 28 April 2007 - 12:21 AM

View PostGodeskian, on Apr 27 2007, 12:25 PM, said:

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 08:10 PM, said:

Anyone who carries HAS to have KNOWLEDGE and SKILLS.  It's part of the tests in order to get such a thing.


Because in America no one can get a gun without a license, and carry it in a concealed holster?

In some states, in order to get a handgun, one must pass a handgun proficiency test.  This covers handgun safety, proper loading/unloading, knowing when and when not to shoot, etc.  Some states also require that with every handgun purchase, you must physically demonstrate how to safely load, and unload the gun before you can take it home.  Many states give you a certificate of some sort as proof you completed these basic requirements.

In order to carry a piece concealed, you must complete a separate course that goes more in depth with handgun safety.  You also have to score well in shooting.  If you're a lousy shooter, you can't carry.  Usually the target is at a minimum of 7 yards/21 feet.  Some states have limits as to how many different handguns you can use to carry on you.  Some states only allow 1 per person.  Some have no limits.  Some states require a separate test for each firearm.  The weapon used for concealed carry will have its serial number recorded on record as a CC weapon, and will appear on the permit/license.  These tests are not easy to pass, and you must agree to the terms of carrying it, or you will lose all cc privilages probably for life at the very least.

View PostG1223, on Apr 27 2007, 08:45 PM, said:

Well lets see the last time I heard of vigilanties was New York City. Where a concealed weapons permits are not issued. And then the number of victims was I think 6 not the dozens you envisioned being gunned down by the poeople with these permits. In this policy has been going on for a while. Where are the piles of dead people.

Where are the reports of the over 4000 killed at that single university in 2006? Since gun owners cannot control their weapons or themselves enough to not kill the dozen or so each day.

Exactly.  Where are all those CC shootouts where hundreds are killed, and scores more struck down in the crossfire?   :rolleyes:
Posted Image
689 Reasons to Defeat Barack Obama in 2012:

https://www.national...at-barack-obama

#34 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 28 April 2007 - 06:24 AM

View PostSpidey, on Apr 28 2007, 05:21 AM, said:

In some states, in order to get a handgun, one must pass a handgun proficiency test.

And in all states, in order to get a handgun, you have to see Vinny or Patrick on the corner (depending on the corner) and give him 3 C notes. He won't ask you to pass a handgun proficiency test.

Quote

Some states also require that with every handgun purchase, you must physically demonstrate how to safely load, and unload the gun before you can take it home.

I have never heard of a state that allows the customer to load the gun in the store. I remember such a scene in "The Terminator". The scene ended badly.

Quote

In order to carry a piece concealed, you must complete a separate course that goes more in depth with handgun safety.

In order to carry a piece concealed, you make sure that the holster is under the jacket.

Quote

You also have to score well in shooting.  If you're a lousy shooter, you can't carry.  Usually the target is at a minimum of 7 yards/21 feet.

But can't the target run, duck, roll, hide, etc.?

View PostG1223, on Apr 27 2007, 08:45 PM, said:

Well lets see the last time I heard of vigilanties was New York City. Where a concealed weapons permits are not issued. And then the number of victims was I think 6 not the dozens you envisioned being gunned down by the poeople with these permits. In this policy has been going on for a while. Where are the piles of dead people.

Any more details on the incident? How many vigilantes? How many innocent people in the room? How many of those shot were hit with "friendly fire"?

Quote

Exactly.  Where are all those CC shootouts where hundreds are killed, and scores more struck down in the crossfire?   :rolleyes:

You're assuming that if it hasn't happened that it won't happen.

#35 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 28 April 2007 - 06:31 AM

View PostBroph, on Apr 28 2007, 12:24 PM, said:

View PostSpidey, on Apr 28 2007, 05:21 AM, said:

In some states, in order to get a handgun, one must pass a handgun proficiency test.

And in all states, in order to get a handgun, you have to see Vinny or Patrick on the corner (depending on the corner) and give him 3 C notes. He won't ask you to pass a handgun proficiency test.

:howling: Yeah, that was pretty much what I meant

Edited by Godeskian, 28 April 2007 - 06:31 AM.

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#36 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 28 April 2007 - 07:45 AM

And that is why lawful citizens should not be allowed to have a concealed permit? Because someone goes out and breaks the law.

Guess what Vinny will be working a booming business in the police state where lawful citizens cannot have guns. They have where laws keep lawful citizens from protecting themselves. The Vinny's of the world always have a way of getting and seling their guns. They are not trying to sell them to the citizen who just want the thing for protection.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#37 DWF

DWF

    Dr. Who 1963-89, 1996, 2005-

  • Islander
  • 48,287 posts

Posted 28 April 2007 - 07:56 AM

Carrying a concealed weapon and knowing how to use one are two different things, people who don't know how to handle a firearm can be more dangerous than one lone gunman with a rife or submachine gun.  :blink:
The longest-running science fiction series: decadent, degenerate and rotten to the core. Power-mad conspirators, Daleks, Sontarans... Cybermen! They're still in the nursery compared to us. Fifty years of absolute fandom. That's what it takes to be really critical.

"Don't mistake a few fans bitching on the Internet for any kind of trend." - Keith R.A. DeCandido

#38 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 28 April 2007 - 08:02 AM

View PostG1223, on Apr 28 2007, 12:45 PM, said:

And that is why lawful citizens should not be allowed to have a concealed permit? Because someone goes out and breaks the law.

I didn't say that. I merely pointed out that it is not necessarily the solution to the problem or as easy as some have tried to make it sound.

Quote

Guess what Vinny will be working a booming business in the police state where lawful citizens cannot have guns.

If they get guns against the law then they're not lawful citizens, now, are they?

Quote

They are not trying to sell them to the citizen who just want the thing for protection.

Home protection is not part of the 2nd amendment.

#39 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 28 April 2007 - 08:06 AM

Quote

Friendly Fire Likely Killed N.Y. Trooper


Email this Story

Apr 28, 1:33 AM (ET)

By MICHAEL VIRTANEN

(AP) Preston Felton, acting superintendent of the New York State Police, speaks during a news conference...
Full Image



ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) - Friendly fire apparently killed a New York state trooper in a gunfight that erupted as he searched a farmhouse for a suspect in the shooting of a colleague, officials said Friday.

Trooper David C. Brinkerhoff was fatally shot Wednesday as he and six other members of the force's elite mobile response team searched a Catskill-area house where the armed suspect had holed up.

The 29-year-old and another trooper were shot by the suspect, Travis Trim, as the two entered the upstairs bedroom where the man had two guns, but it is one of the about 70 police rounds fired that officials believe killed Brinkerhoff.

.
.
.

The bullet from Trim's handgun hit Brinkerhoff's body armor, possibly knocking him down to one knee. Brinkerhoff, who was wearing a Kevlar helmet, was then shot in the back of the head with a bullet that may have been a ricochet, Felton said.

Whoops!

And 70 rounds to take down one suspect. What was someone saying earlier about Cho being a poor shot?

#40 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 28 April 2007 - 08:28 AM

View PostGodeskian, on Apr 27 2007, 03:25 PM, said:

View PostSpidey, on Apr 27 2007, 08:10 PM, said:

Anyone who carries HAS to have KNOWLEDGE and SKILLS.  It's part of the tests in order to get such a thing.


Because in America no one can get a gun without a license, and carry it in a concealed holster?




Spidey was pointing out HOW LAWFUL CITZENS are required to show these skills to gain a lawful permit. And you guys jumped on him about hail of bulliets to imply everyone and his mother would open fire like out of some movie.


That is how he has meant his comments but you want somehow to put his comments down.

The truth is millions of americans own guns we do not have millions of gun related deaths. We do not have millions of accidents with guns. We do not have such trust in the government to not suspect it of being tyrant waiting till we are disarmed. After all no one looks like Joe McCarthy till they are in the door.


If someone had started the gun fight at this campus maybe more would be dead and maybe less. But at least armed they have the right to protect themsleves and also the chance. Armed they might stop it before it got out of hand. It is the assumption that people can react in a proper manner that is the basis for laws in this country.

We require that drivers in this country show a understanding of the basic laws of the road. Those laws are different in each state. The same is there for gun laws.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Utah, 2007, Concealed Weapons

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users